A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

A. The Prosecutor’s Bill of Indictment 1) Of the judgment of the court of first instance, with respect to the crime Nos. 1 and 2 of the case of [2014dan19] among the judgment of the court of first instance (the fabrication of private documents and the uttering of falsified investigation documents), the Prosecutor added “the use of private electronic records, etc.” to the name of the crime, and added “the use of private electronic records, etc.” under Article 232-2 of the Criminal Act, and applied for the amendment of the indictment with the content of the modification as stated in the subparagraphs 1 and 2 below [the charges modified] as stated in the facts charged under Articles 1 and 2.

1. On November 5, 2012, the Defendant, in writing, such as private electromagnetic records, etc., is a clerical error in the name of the Hyundai Savings Bank in the application for changes in the Bill of Indictment of Hyundai Savings Bank.

2. On November 5, 2012, the Defendant entered “6,00,000 won”, “6,00,000,” and “C’s resident registration number, telephone number, name, etc. in the loan column of the “credit transaction agreement (application)” in the form of “credit transaction agreement (application)” and sent one copy of the “credit transaction agreement (application)” in the name of C, which is the prior recording of rights and obligations, by means of electronic signature, and sent the electronic records to the person in charge of the Internet loan of the said company as if the electronic records were authentic.